As Massachusetts officials collect bids for replacing one of the busiest courthouses in the state, details on one possible proposal emerged at a recent Historical Commission meeting in Springfield. What needs to come down for it to potentially go up has preservation advocates concerned.
During a public hearing in May, residents made it clear that when the Roderick L. Ireland Courthouse comes down, its replacement should stay downtown.
After state officials declared the building needed to be replaced in recent years, plans for a private-public partnership were announced, designed to develop the site for a new courthouse.
That means the picking a private developer that could be trusted to secure the land and build an acceptable facility. The new building would then be leased to the commonwealth’s court system for decades.
Bids are now being accepted, and on Thursday, Sept. 18, the details on a potential plan were partially unveiled at a city Historical Commission meeting.
The proposal came from a group that wants to demolish several buildings at the corner of Lyman, Chestnut and Taylor streets, near Union Station- less than a mile from the current courthouse.
Jeb Balise, CEO of Balise Motor Sales, is part of the group, which came before the commission asking for a waiver to expedite potential demolition work.
“… and the question [the commission’s] asked - the most important question - ‘is this just a couple of guys that want to get a courthouse?’ … we look at it as a significant opportunity for the neighborhood and for the downtown, and we believe it's a compelling bid to make, a compelling proposal,” Balise said.
Several of the buildings they are likely to demolish are considered historic and as advocates like the Springfield Preservation Trust pointed out, at least two are on the National Register of Historic Places, including the old Produce Exchange Building, built in 1899.
Trust President Erica Swallow posited the Exchange and the adjacent Cutler & Porter Block building, could be preserved somehow.
“… I think with the really strong team that the developer is putting together, there is an opportunity to save the two National Register buildings [at] 113 and 127 [Lyman Street], so I would encourage [the commission] to deny the demolition waiver today, but to have the developer come up with a plan that can maybe preserve those two, integrated into the design.”
The developers argue that significant deterioration and other factors like asbestos make renovating the structures a tall order.
Because of the buildings’ historic nature, the developers needed a waiver to avoid a nine-month demolition delay that is standard for such properties. The commission ultimately decided to waive the demo delay.
The decision in favor of the developers comes as the mid-October deadline for submitting courthouse redevelopment proposals approaches. The state has said it plans to have a bidder picked by early 2026.
In case the state rejects his group’s bid, Balise said his group would find an alternative development for the site. Balise added that an architect he had enlisted was confident he could “pay tribute to the historical significance of the building in a new courthouse scenario.”
“Incidentally, I should point out the RFP for the courthouse is very specific of what we need to do for historical significance so if we ignore that, it's akin to saying we don't want to win the bid,” he told the commission.
—
This piece originally aired on Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2025
